[GhoStar]

Highly respected (and very popular) magazine Famitsu has reviewed Phantasy Star Online Episode 1 & 2 on the Nintendo Gamecube. Scores of 9, 9, 8, 9 were given, meaning it gets an overall 35/40 and a Famitsu Platinum grade (given to games scoring between 35 and 40 overall).

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: GhoStar on 2002-09-04 04:38 ]</font>

[Rune]

Very nice.

[TeamPhalanx]

Raw scores don't say much. What were the reasons for the high marks?

Unless there's a huge change in AI, I don't think I can give the game anything higher than an 8.

[GhoStar]

Well, raw scores do serve a purpose, in that they give an outline of how good the reviewer thought the game was. All summed up in a single number.

The issue isn't available until tommorow, and I got this off a Japanese news site.

I'll try and get someone to translate the text, but I doubt it'll go into much detail about stats and AI.

[Cube]

35/40 is an AMAZING Famitsu score. And im not surprised that the game scored well. The first game for DC scored around this as well.

What this probably does prove however is that the game is not a simple hash port, and is still highly enjoyable.

yay!

[l337_h4xOr]

The score is really meaningless. The Japaneese have a much different opinion of what is "good" then we here in the west do (unless you are one of thoes weiners that wishes you were japaneese and runs around saying "chan" and "arigato"). For instance the Highly aclaimed HALO (which recieved almost perfect scores here in the states) did not do well in the japaneese press, Simply because they are not fond of FPS games. Conversely in Japan Dating Sims and Derby games do VERY well in the press where they are laughed at here. The Fact that PSO E1&2 recieved good scores is with out a doubt a good sign but it is hardly a testament to how "good" the game is, or will be rather, to us. I remember hearing someone say that the original PSO got high scores in japan simply because it had a chat feature.

[omega3059]

On 2002-09-04 13:42, 1337_h4xOr wrote:
The score is really meaningless. The Japaneese have a much different opinion of what is "good" then we here in the west do (unless you are one of thoes weiners that wishes you were japaneese and runs around saying "chan" and "arigato"). For instance the Highly aclaimed HALO (which recieved almost perfect scores here in the states) did not do well in the japaneese press, Simply because they are not fond of FPS games. Conversely in Japan Dating Sims and Derby games do VERY well in the press where they are laughed at here. The Fact that PSO E1&2 recieved good scores is with out a doubt a good sign but it is hardly a testament to how "good" the game is, or will be rather, to us. I remember hearing someone say that the original PSO got high scores in japan simply because it had a chat feature.

true... but you forget that pso is not a FPS or a dating sim, it is an online rpg... which both the US and Japan like, so i think the reviews on pso r not meaningless...

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: omega3059 on 2002-09-04 14:40 ]</font>

[l337_h4xOr]

yes but the reasons that it got good scores may not be reasons that you like. I am looking forward to it and plan on importing, all I am saying is that dont let Famitsu be your "be all end all".

[GhoStar]

Japan doesn't like First Person Shooters, so that's why Halo (and Xbox) performed so poorly at retail. And Halo received respectable scores. Famitsu gave it a 9, 7, 8, 9, which is very good.

Simply put, the Japanese prefer a game like PSO to Halo. And before someone comes in saying PSO E1 & 2 is rehash (which it isn't), who's to say the reviewers who reviewed this version had played the old games? I doubt that's mandatory in any way, so to them it could be a completely new experience, commendable on its own merits.

[Parn]

Like I said before, Famitsu gave the original PSO a high score because you could chat online with it on a console.

Famitsu, like many other magazines, have a quota to fill and they can only play each game so many hours before slapping in a score and moving on to the next title. They couldn't have possibly played the game long enough to give it a thorough and rightful scoring.

If you want the real meat, look no further than the internet. Magazines typically have a few numbers and a paragraph or two for their reviews... most sites have much, MUCH more detail to explain their scoring. They'll typically finish playing the game before passing judgement; the proper way to review a game.